PonyFans.com

From The Athletic:

New NIL enforcement targets collectives, deals must serve ΓÇÿvalid business purposeΓÇÖ

By Stewart Mandel

A new college sports enforcement arm charged with regulating name, image and likeness payments to athletes issued guidance Thursday that could make it extremely difficult for school-affiliated collectives to get their deals with athletes approved.

The recently approved House settlement, which took effect on July 1, established a clearinghouse, called NIL Go, that must approve all third-party deals for more than $600. The two main requirements for those deals are that theyΓÇÖre for a ΓÇ£valid business purposeΓÇ¥ and within a fair-market ΓÇ£range of compensation.ΓÇ¥

The goal is to prevent schools from utilizing booster-driven entities to funnel payments to recruits and transfers as a workaround to the $20.5 million revenue-sharing cap.

To read this article in its entirety (subscription required), CLICK HERE.

We all knew this type of rule / restriction was on the horizon - hopefully, we behave this time around.

So, what is the fair market range of compensation for a Livvy Dunne? Or remember when we had that OL who was a world class concert pianist? I don't know if we have any Livvy Dunne looking volleyball, soccer, swimming, equestrian competitors, but I would not be surprised if we do.

So now the NCAA's enforcement arm is going to tell business owners what they should (or should not) be spending for advertising?

And now Putin's puppet wants to get involved in regulating NIL?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... ulate-nil/

Charleston Pony wrote:So now the NCAA's enforcement arm is going to tell business owners what they should (or should not) be spending for advertising?

I wondered the same thing, and the more I thought about it, the more I think it's just empty posturing by the NCAA. It's all good and well to suggest they're going to try to help rein this stuff in, but it's impossible. My company doesn't sponsor any athletes, but if it did, there's no way it would share how much it was spending on an individual athlete or the total spent on all athletes. I'm not sure I can think of a single business that would talk about how much it's paying an athlete, college or pro. Sure, they'd be happy to have a star endorsing their brand, but revealing financial commitments makes no sense.

The NCAA can try to limit the amount a school pays to its athletes, but to suggest it can police what private businesses hand out is unrealistic. That would just go back to the way things were 40 years ago.

The money-for-athletes genie is out of the bottle. It's time for the NCAA to accept that and find other issues on which to focus its attention.

This is just subjective enough to allow for bias in favor of the big money schools who don't like competing with the SMUs of the world for talent. This stinks to high heaven.